Every time one of these news events happens and everyone proclaims Twitter the ultimate information source, I go look at it and find tons of useless crap (as is noted in the article you reference). If you happen to know of a Twitterer near an event who is providing useful information, that can be quite compelling, but mostly, the insistence that Twitter is the ultimate new way to know what’s going on is pretty dumb. Journalists who filter and amalgamate information and provide perspective are much more helpful, and with online news, you don’t have to wait till the next morning to learn something.

“The cybercriminals added a malicious obfuscated script to the infected page. The injected script injects a malicious IFrame to the page.

The injected IFrame automatically loads another malicious script from a remote server controlled by criminals in Russia, causing a possible installation of malware on the unsuspecting client machine. The remote Russian server is already down.”

CBS page on the security website suggests that it was one used by the public to look for live-show ticket availability. Seems reasonable to think that there would be quite a lot of hits on this page, probably from an interesting demographic section of pc users.

I wonder what their system-security looks like and how many actually got seeded with the drive-by malware.

Good editors are extremely valuable. Now, they’re not all good, of course; but if, say, I’m reading financial news, I’d really like someone who has a deeper knowledge than me of the topic who can provide background, put events in context, and so on. That’s a lot more useful than, say, knowing that a bunch of people who know nothing more than I do about a topic voted for it on Digg.